On 01.12.2006 17:05, Trans wrote:
> James Edward Gray II wrote:
>> On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:22 PM, Trans wrote:
>>
>>> Someone recently mentioned missing posts. I just did a comparsion of
>>> comp.lang.ruby and ruby-talk-google and indeed the usenet is missing
>>> posts.
>> Here's the information I have on this currently:
>>
>> *  I rewrote the entire Gateway this last week, so anything before
>> that is history.  The news-to-email side is already deployed.  My
>> email-to-news code is complete, but not deployed.  (Our SysAdmin will
>> get to it soon now.)  If you raise issues, please make sure they are
>> recent.
>> * I now have very detailed logs on everything the Gateway does, so
>> please be specific.  For example, tell me which messages are missing,
>> not just that they are.
>> * Our Usenet host does not allow us to post HTML emails.  This is not
>> changing.  (I'm not bothered by this because I do not believe anyone
>> should be sending HTML email to Ruby Talk.)
>> * Our Gateway is an NNTP <-> email Gateway.  There has been at least
>> one instance of a Usenet post using ancient header formatting
>> predating NNTP.  These messages are not supported.
> 
> Have a look at recent topic: Wisdom of including Rakefile in releases.
> The 2nd post from Jason Roelofs appears to be missing.

I do not see *any* posting of Jason on the news side and only a single 
posting on the email side:

<quote>
Rakefiles allow users to run the tests for themselves, to understand how a
library is put together, etc. The only thing that can go wrong is that the
stuff doesn't work (unless you're grabbing very untrustworthy packages, but
assumptions have to be made somewhere). Not to mention, having the Rakefile
there allows other people to properly make changes to a library if / when
they need to.

I don't see anything bad with including said Rakefiles. Do you have any
specific worries?
</quote>

Cheers

	robert